The company cites Nvidia's "key role in realizing PC gaming graphics".
So many damn Nividia GPUs outthere and Nintendo went for a mobile one ?, seriously Nintendo couldn't you at least try to implement a proper GPU ? how about put one in that docking thing ?, oh yeah I forgot you give a damn about innovation & gamers, and care only about greed.
let's wait until we see the entire roadmap. what you described could end up being the Supplemental Computing Device that Nintendo filed patents for last year. Could be a way to increase the docked performance even more down the road. Surprised it took this long for a console to go back to Nvidia considering their success in the GPU world. They couldn't exactly fit a 1060 or something like that in the Switch unit, so a Tegra was right in line with their vision.
Do you really believe seeing the entire roadmap will change the eventual realization that Switch will turn out just like a large group of gamers already know it will turn out!? Another half-step made by Nintendo to try to recapture the glory days of the WII! My take is, it'll start out fun, but that fun will wear thin real quick just like the WII..
@stuna1 - the console's main function, the whole idea behind this thing is the fact that you can take it with you or play it on your TV. That's the whole reason for the name of the console. Sure there are *some* titles that utilize motion controls. But don't kid yourself. Casuals don't buy 3DS's or Vita's, at least not the same casuals that bought the Wii. This thing is still a gaming machine first. Sure it's not as powerful as the others, but the N64 was the last time Nintendo wanted to have the most powerful hardware out there.
The companies left NVIDIA, because NVIDIA cost more than AMD in the desktop range with often minor power differences (and I would assume this was big in bargaining between Sony & MS). In the case of a console where every dollar matters towards your end profit, it didn't and doesn't make sense to go with NVIDIA for a 10% - 20% boost in performance (which translates to a few fps), at the cost of $50 or more added to your console. Especially if that means your competitor is going to be $50 less, or making a profit that can be put towards software, while you're barely breaking even. It just doesn't make sense for a budget friendly gaming device (which is what a console i supposed to be). NVIDIA priced themselves out of that market, since they know they own the PC GPU market, but the tables turned on them this gen.
If you want the "best of the best," PC is where you should be. In a couple of years, people will be playing AAA games on their smart phones with Bluetooth controllers.
You can count me out on playing AAA on my smart phone, that's what I bought my big ass TV for.
Yeah but Nintendo games don't come out on PC. All the more reason to why they should have made a competent console. Something at around 1TFLOPS would have been $250 and really make their games shine with their art style. I think even PC gamers would be jealous of how beautiful Nintendo games could be with that kind of power.
oh because mobile tech will keep improving and desktop tech wont? you make no sense.
@fenome Obviously the Smart Phones will connect to the TV... 😂
No they won't. People (generally speaking) don't want to play AAA games on mobile. They want games that are accessible and can be played in short bursts. Home console is where the demand for AAA is. I can't believe Nintendo doesn't see this.
@ omnislash....switch is around 1tflop. At a minimum it is 0.875 tflop but possibly more with customisations. Digital foundry reported switch is slightly more powerful than the wii u while undocked. Wii u is 350gflops. They also reported docked it is 2.5x this power...2.5x 350 is .875gflops plus 2.5x slightly more ( whatever slightly more is). So a minimum .875 + a bit more.
There are no reports of it being 2.5x Wii U's power when docked, the only reports are that it's 40% of the power when undocked. Seriously wait for the specs, you're going to be disappointed.
@ omnislash "There are no reports of it being 2.5x Wii U's power when docked" "Quote from digital foundry " "As things stand, a docked Switch features a GPU with 2.5x the power of the same unit running from battery. " "Even a 307.2MHz GPU based on Maxwell technology should be capable of out-performing Wii U" "307.2MHz - meaning that in portable mode, Switch runs at exactly 40 per cent of the clock-speed of the fully docked device." https://www.google.com.au/a... We know undocked switch is at least equal to the wii u. Just look at mk8, zelda etc. It runs these ports equal to or better than the wii u while undocked. Then docked it is 2.5x the power.....so it is at least 2.5x the power of a wii u. Plus 1080p (mk8) requires at least 2x the power to increase from 720p to 1080p.
A proper GPU would use more power than the entire Switch console. Should tell you right there what to expect performance-wise. If Nvidia had magic, it would already be in their desktop GPUs.
Yeah, because there are no "m" variants for those GPUs that uses less power than their PC counterparts /s
Are you telling me, with a straight face, right now, if I have a mobile 1070 and run it against a desktop 1070 they will be equal? Tell me, why does Nvida need desktop versions if the mobile ones are smaller, cheaper, and run cooler?
you just want those with less power, right? at least those are better than Tegra
@badz149 Yea, but even the "mobile" variants of nVidia draw significantly more power than a Tegra. Orders of magnitude more. A GTX 1050 mobile might be able to draw somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 watts (possibly more like 50) and Tegra - a chip which is an entire System on a Chip - draws in the neighborhood of 10 watts total. Obviously Nintendo is completely locked out of power like that if they want to remain mobile in a tablet sized device, only reaching laptop class parts if they want laptop sized form-factors and battery packs. Not suggesting it was the right choice, just saying that even the lowest powered "m" class card would draw far too much for Switch to operate in handheld mode.
@masterfox well to create a handheld, they had to put a mobile GPU in it. oh wait, it's a HOME CONSOLE as per Nintendo......
A mobile GPU for a mobile console.... who would have thunk it??? LOL I guess you want them to fit a GTX1080 in the tablet eh? A GTX 1080 alone is bigger than the entire console...
More like......... Nvidia: Getting our chip on atleast one console was "top priority". We couldn't be completely left out.
Nvidia has been doing just fine without consoles
They could be doing better with them, but I am glad Amd got in there.
They would be doing better with the consoles added to their portfolio. That AMD got the PS4 and the X1 has got to be a sore spot.
Thats why Nvidia didnt waste any effort in just selling Nintendo the Nvidia Shield.
No.... more like... Nvidia: We can't sell these damn shields, we need to dump these old processors!
Nvidia doesnt have a great track record with consoles, they screwed the Xbox and the Ps3 I hope it doesnt happen to nintendo.
I'm not saying your wrong, but how did it screw the ps3? I can't see how Nvidia harmed (screwed) it.
I don't know about last generation but I know during the making of PS4, PlayStation try to work a deal with Nvidia but NV wanted more money and PlayStation jump ship to AMD who offer a great deal. I also hear the same story with the Xbone.
Yep, they blasted consoles on their "Margins" and said they are not profitable. And I got confused with IBM on the Ps3 so Nvidia didnt screw Sony.
Picture me confused as well. Sony screwed themselves with the convoluted Cell and its limited subprocessors. That was not (and can't believe ever would have been) an Nvidia project.
The GPU that shipped with the PS3 was Nvidia and wasn't as advanced as the one found in the Xbox 360 (AMD). The Xbox 360 was the first device to have a Unified Shader architecture, even beating PCs to this if memory serves me right. That unified architecture helped the Xbox 360 pull out to an early lead graphically speaking.
@Blood_spiller No. The early "graphics lead" was entirely based on the fact that third parties did not actually use the Cell initially. They limited themselves to the Power PC Core + GPU and as soon as the Cell was being utilized the tables turned. The Cell is a crazy beast for graphic/physics intensive workloads and the system was designed to be supplemented by it. People initially over hyped the 360's GPU, and under hyped the GPU in the PS3 simply because the masses found it easier to afford the 360. When people opt for the cheaper thing, they have a natural tendency to justify it.
nvidia didnt screw ps3.... the only reason sony went with amd for ps4 was because at the time amd was extremely desprite to get the deal they were on the brink of bankrupcy and basicly offered such a low deal that nvidia didnt want to counter offer it was too low for nividia to bother with and of course when offered something for 80% less then its compitition sony went with AMD. AMD just needed it to keep the lights on in there building they arent really making any thing off the deal profit wise
I believe nVidia is not to be blamed for the PS3 issues. In fact, Sony initially didn't even want to put a dedicated GPU in the PS3 because they wanted to do it solely using the CELL BE just like how they used the EE in the PS2 but it was too drastic and they decided to couple the CELL with the RSX, a nVidia custom made, underclocked 7800GTX. It was not supposed to handle graphics alone but most 3rd parties did it anyway to unsatisfactory results because CELL is kinda alien to them at first.
They did not screw PS3. Sony decided to have no GPU and just two CELL processors. Last minute Sony changed their minds and asked Nvidia and with what little time they had whipped up something.
At least it should have tegra x2...
I think they want with the x1 because of cost more than anything else. Plus from what I have read it's not just an out of the box x1. I think people need to stop going on about power ect and let the developers show off what the console can do. Game on the Xbox one ps4 and wiiu looked amazing so no reason they can't on the switch. Add that the switch can be used as a portable to it adds something different to the other to. For me I did not want a console the same as the ps4/Xbox one I wanted something different and really like the look of the switch. It may not get the big 3rd party games like GTA ect but I don't think Nintendo need that to sell their consoles. Only time will tell if the switch is a hit or not with the public.
"For me I did not want a console the same as the ps4/Xbox one I wanted something different..." I think many wished the Switch to be as powerful as those 2. Imagine a Nintendo's console with the PS4's power and Nintendo's IPs. Wouldn't that be wonderful? And 3rd parties can release their games as usual like they do on those 2 too due to the parity in power. That particular console would dominate the market easy. That's how you set yourself different from the others, exclusives, not this going underpowered BS! And they have the guts to sell it at the same price as the most dominant console this gen too. What Nintendo is doing right now is not being different, but rather them being stupid or outright crazy!
@badz that still would not of mattered. People pick anything to moan about. If it was more powerful they would of picked on the cost or not having a normal controller in the box, online cost ect. No matter what Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo do the fan boys/keyboard worriers will be out.
Knowing nin they prob went with the lower k1(nvidia tablet) but modified to have an extra gig of ram lol.but we know nin is cheap so i bet its the same x1 thats in the nvidia tv
exactly what I'm thinking. If it was the new tegra pascal chip they would have been bragging about it.
*shield. I don't think Nintendo went for the more powerful option, for portability's sake.
No it's an X1.
NVDIA TEGRA WHAT!? what tegra is it, time to talk specifics nintendo, it releases in less than a month.
Apparently it wasn't important enough to wait for Pascal architecture which would have put it at the same level as a PS4/X1.
It would not. But thats cute!
The Tegra X2 which is Pascal based, is 1.5TF stock. That is about 25% more powerful than the base XB1.
https://arstechnica.com/gam... http://www.anandtech.com/sh... A couple interesting articles about the NVidia Tegra chip used in the Switch. It can get a TFLOP out of it, if you care about that. "Finally, let’s talk about clockspeeds and expected performance. While NVIDIA is not officially publishing the GPU clockspeeds for the X1, based on their performance figures it’s easy to figure out. With NVIDIA’s quoted (and promoted) 1 TFLOPs FP16 performance figure for the X1, the clockspeed works out to a full 1GHz for the GPU (1GHz * 2 FP 16 * 2 FMA * 256 = 1 TFLOPs)."
The switch peaks @ 700mhz. 300 when undocked.
That is at FP16. It is the same as people saying the PS4 Pro is 8TF or the XB1 being 12TF. The Tegra X1 has a standard operating spec of 512 Gflops.
I thought the ps4 xb1 went off of xp32 format. Ill have to check on this again but arent the tflops doubled at xp16?
dont u double the tflops at xp16 when compared to xp32? So the xb1 woupd be over 2 tflops and ps4 over 3. U cant. Compare the xp16 tflops of one console to the xp32 on another.
shouldn't their top priority have been to keep up with the times as far as console specs go?
Not when they're making a mobile device. The Switch is as much a successor to the DS as it is to the Wii U.
they're marketing it as a home console, though... http://www.polygon.com/2016...
But it's clearly both. Honestly the Switch is Nintendo's best move in ages. I haven't owned a Nintendo device since the GameBoy Color, but that'll definitely change with the Switch. It doesn't really matter how they market it, the fact that it's spec'd like a tablet means it's a mobile device.
But that's his point. It's a game system that can be played on the go. It was never going to have power comparable to the PS4 or Xbox One. I can't take my PS4 out of the house and play it anywhere I want after all. They are very different kinds of devices. The mobile nature of the Switch places constraints on how much performance its hardware can offer.
Panda, so you think Ninty's best move in ages is marketing an overpriced portable as an underpowered console? And one that bases its singular nature on the ability to offer console games on the go; a concept that's already proven to fail (Vita)? Seems to me they're exiting the console business altogether and just cleverly masquerading it. Why not just undock the system and sell it as a true portable for $199? Sell the rest as optional accessories for those gamers who want who want a traditional console experience. But darn that 3DS, cash cows die off slowly and we know Nintendo will milk that last udder dry
Well considering I've never once considered buying a 3DS or a Wii/U, but am actively considering a Switch tells me they've done something right with their approach.
You think it's X1 or something proprietary for the Switch?
lol.. it was a top priority because they've(Nvidia) already got a switch on the market(the shield), and rebranding it and adding nintendo-esque controllers was simple and cheap. The custom bits of the nintendo are solely for the controllers, docking, and carts.
How many people here actually understand what makes a console powerful. Leave the tech specs to the game designers, leave the gaming to me.
"Nvidia's key role in realizing PC gaming graphics". Translation: "We were able to bully nvidia into agreeing to our YoY hardware margins as we see fit because AMD's been shitting on them in the console space for the past two generations. Please understand. LUL"
"Shitting on them in the console space" Maybe in terms of units sold, but consoles GPUs have extremely low profit margins.It doesn't really matter if AMD has 100% of the console market if they're barely keeping their finances in order. Nvidia on the other hand dominates like 70% of the PC graphics market, which is a much larger and more profitable market.
I personally am glad Nintendo is using Nvidia Tegra Processor technology inside of the Nintendo Switch. Sorry to inform the Ps4 and Xbox fanboys and fangirls but I and a lot of other people don't want to forgo enjoying life to only enjoy gaming by being glued to our TV's/Monitors. My only gripe with Nintendo at the moment is that they need to kill off the Nintendo 3DS and devote all of their efforts into the Nintendo Switch!
their top priority should have been improving their relations to the 3rd parties... more than three decades and they still haven't got the clue why their early successes were happening.